[markjo]

Please read the rest of the thread. This point has already been brought to Tom's attention and he has not yet found a way to get his argument back on track.

Sometimes you need to club Tom on the head a few times with the facts before they finally sink in.

[Tom Bishop]

Sounds like a question for the professionals Tom.  In the meantime, unless you can find some proof that this BD has a core in the millions of degrees, perhaps you should retract the comment?

The equations say that Deuterium burning requires a minimum temperature. If it's not Deuterium being burnt, then you are going to have to provide an alternative mechanism.

The argument that "we don't know what's powering it" is a tact admission that Astronomy is not reliable as a science.

I do not have to provide an alternative. I made the claim that the BD was not burning deuterium and I have substantiated it. I also never said "we don't know what's powering it" and made no "tact[sic] admission that Astronomy is not a reliable science. You should trying to force your opinions in to my words it makes you appear desperate.

If the star is not burning Deuterium, and "we don't know what's powering it" is an inaccurate statement, then maybe you can do us all a favor and tell us what powers it.

[Gulliver]

... tell us what powers it.

Does this imply that you're finally ready to tell us what powers the FET Sun (and Moon and stars)? We've been waiting for years, centuries even, after all.

[Tom Bishop]

... tell us what powers it.

Does this imply that you're finally ready to tell us what powers the FET Sun (and Moon and stars)? We've been waiting for years, centuries even, after all.

Please start a new thread if you would like to go off topic.

[Rama Set]

Sounds like a question for the professionals Tom.  In the meantime, unless you can find some proof that this BD has a core in the millions of degrees, perhaps you should retract the comment?

The equations say that Deuterium burning requires a minimum temperature. If it's not Deuterium being burnt, then you are going to have to provide an alternative mechanism.

The argument that "we don't know what's powering it" is a tact admission that Astronomy is not reliable as a science.

I do not have to provide an alternative. I made the claim that the BD was not burning deuterium and I have substantiated it. I also never said "we don't know what's powering it" and made no "tact[sic] admission that Astronomy is not a reliable science. You should trying to force your opinions in to my words it makes you appear desperate.

If the star is not burning Deuterium, and "we don't know what's powering it" is an inaccurate statement, then maybe you can do us all a favor and tell us what powers it.

All I know is that it is not deuterium fusion, making your claim of a core temperature in the millions of Celsius speculative and unsubstantiated. Unless you have new ground to break, this conversation is at a dead end.

[garygreen]

It isn't 'powered' by anything.  The core of a giant ball of gas doesn't have to burn fuel to be hot.  See: gas giants.  This is what I was getting at with the Jupiter example on the first page.  This is all perfectly consistent with how modern science describes all the gas giants. 

Jupiter's core is very hot.  Jupiter's surface is very cold.  Convection is happening in between. 

http://www.universetoday.com/11096/jupiters-winds-come-from-inside/

“Our model suggests convection driven by deep internal heat sources power Jupiter’s surface winds,” said Jonathan Aurnou, UCLA assistant professor of planetary physics. “The model provides a possible answer to why the winds are so stable for centuries. Jupiter’s surface is the tail; the dog is the hot interior of the planet."

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/page/jupiter_saturn

Heat from the interior of Jupiter causes circulation patterns in the atmosphere, with warm gas rising and cooling, before sinking back into the depths of the planet. This process is called convection, and it causes the different colored bands in Jupiter's atmosphere.

[Gulliver]

... tell us what powers it.

Does this imply that you're finally ready to tell us what powers the FET Sun (and Moon and stars)? We've been waiting for years, centuries even, after all.

Please start a new thread if you would like to go off topic.

I apologize. I though my sarcasm was clear, given the hypocrisy involved. Please just treat the question as rhetorical intended to only cause the reader (especially noobs) to ponder the relative standards of documentation required by the REers versus FEers. Sorry and Thanks.

[Tom Bishop]

All I know is that it is not deuterium fusion, making your claim of a core temperature in the millions of Celsius speculative and unsubstantiated. Unless you have new ground to break, this conversation is at a dead end.

The answer coming from this thread is that "it's a mystery in Astronomy." Exactly my point. This star cannot be explained by Astronomy, and so some new mystery power source needs to be created to explain it.

It isn't 'powered' by anything.  The core of a giant ball of gas doesn't have to burn fuel to be hot.  See: gas giants.  This is what I was getting at with the Jupiter example on the first page.  This is all perfectly consistent with how modern science describes all the gas giants. 

Jupiter's core is very hot.  Jupiter's surface is very cold.  Convection is happening in between. 

http://www.universetoday.com/11096/jupiters-winds-come-from-inside/

“Our model suggests convection driven by deep internal heat sources power Jupiter’s surface winds,” said Jonathan Aurnou, UCLA assistant professor of planetary physics. “The model provides a possible answer to why the winds are so stable for centuries. Jupiter’s surface is the tail; the dog is the hot interior of the planet."

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/page/jupiter_saturn

Heat from the interior of Jupiter causes circulation patterns in the atmosphere, with warm gas rising and cooling, before sinking back into the depths of the planet. This process is called convection, and it causes the different colored bands in Jupiter's atmosphere.

Last I checked Jupiter was not self luminous.

From page 31 of The Outline of Science Vol 1 we read:

"The interior of Jupiter is very hot, but the planet is not self-luminous. The planets Venus and Jupiter shin very brightly, but they have no light of their own; they reflect sunlight."

[Rama Set]

All I know is that it is not deuterium fusion, making your claim of a core temperature in the millions of Celsius speculative and unsubstantiated. Unless you have new ground to break, this conversation is at a dead end.

The answer coming from this thread is that "it's a mystery in Astronomy." Exactly my point. This star cannot be explained by Astronomy, and so some new mystery power source needs to be created to explain it.

Tom, you make it sound like we are all astronomers here, and can definitively say that there is no answer in science at this time.  Are you an astronomer?  I am not.  But a very quick search on the intrawebs showed that there are lots and lots of papers on the workings of Brown Dwarfs.  They require payment and this is your bone to pick, so why dont you pony up?  You might find the answer you are not looking for.

Setting that aside and indulging your "argument" hypothetically, you are saying that because there is no answer now that there never will be?  If that is the horse you want to bet on, be my guest, but historically, the odds are against you.

[Gulliver]

All I know is that it is not deuterium fusion, making your claim of a core temperature in the millions of Celsius speculative and unsubstantiated. Unless you have new ground to break, this conversation is at a dead end.

The answer coming from this thread is that "it's a mystery in Astronomy." Exactly my point. This star cannot be explained by Astronomy, and so some new mystery power source needs to be created to explain it.

Tom, you make it sound like we are all astronomers here, and can definitively say that there is no answer in science at this time.  Are you an astronomer?  I am not.  But a very quick search on the intrawebs showed that there are lots and lots of papers on the workings of Brown Dwarfs.  They require payment and this is your bone to pick, so why dont you pony up?  You might find the answer you are not looking for.

Setting that aside and indulging your "argument" hypothetically, you are saying that because there is no answer now that there never will be?  If that is the horse you want to bet on, be my guest, but historically, the odds are against you.

While I'm not active in the field, I can assure you that all objects (Let's use Mars as the lower limitin mass.) derive almost all of their energy from gravity in one way or another. (Even the fission decay of radioactive isotopes is fostered by gravity's compression into sections of planets. So we know that this newly discovered WISE target got some energy from gravity. (By the way, you do a great job posting here.)

[Tom Bishop]

Tom, you make it sound like we are all astronomers here, and can definitively say that there is no answer in science at this time.  Are you an astronomer?  I am not.  But a very quick search on the intrawebs showed that there are lots and lots of papers on the workings of Brown Dwarfs.  They require payment and this is your bone to pick, so why dont you pony up?  You might find the answer you are not looking for.

Setting that aside and indulging your "argument" hypothetically, you are saying that because there is no answer now that there never will be?  If that is the horse you want to bet on, be my guest, but historically, the odds are against you.

I see. Mystery then.

[Rama Set]

Still waiting for you to get your argument back in track. Or are you saying that only omniscience is truly trustworthy?  I could maybe get behind that if phrased properly.

[garygreen]

Last I checked Jupiter was not self luminous.

Neither are brown dwarfs.  At least, not in the same way as stars with fusion in their cores.  They're just like Jupiter in this regard, only larger.

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/astronomy/BrownDwarf.html

A failed star which is not massive enough to ignite thermonuclear fusion in the core. According to stellar models, the maximum mass a brown dwarf can have is ~0.08M☉. Young brown dwarfs which are gravitationally contracting can release substantial amounts of gravitational energy, but older stars radiate from remnant internal heat only. For old brown dwarfs, the luminosity is smaller than smallest luminosity possible for a hydrogen-fusing star,  ~0.0001L☉.

Just like Jupiter, brown dwarfs emit infrared radiation.  That's how astronomers find them.  They're very faint, and it's apparently quite difficult to detect them.

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/cosmic_reference/brown_dwarfs.html

Brown dwarfs are very dim and cool compared with stars. The best hope for finding brown dwarfs is in using infrared telescopes, which can detect the heat from these objects even though they are too cool to radiate visible light.

[Nonbeliever]

Maybe off-topic, but...

A. Recent information released by NASA prove they are wrong.

B. NASA is a conspiracy devoted to perpetuating a RE.

Pick one.

[Gulliver]

Maybe off-topic, but...

A. Recent information released by NASA prove they are wrong.

B. NASA is a conspiracy devoted to perpetuating a RE.

Pick one.

To pile on.... why is an unresolved question about a two-hundred-year more advanced theory in any way an argument against the more advanced theory?

[fappenhosen]

Maybe off-topic, but...

A. Recent information released by NASA prove they are wrong.

B. NASA is a conspiracy devoted to perpetuating a RE.

Pick one.

Both. NASA is a conspiracy that aims to decieve the population. Its no surprise they get tripped up by their own lies.

[jroa]

Don't forget that they are also Satanists.  These type of people have a hard time separating the truth from fiction in their own minds. 

[fappenhosen]

Anyone who denies the word of God (BIBLE) is a Satanist.

[Nonbeliever]

Pardon my dullness, but the above three posts are satire, correct?

[Pete Svarrior]

Pardon my dullness, but the above three posts are satire, correct?

It is fair to assume that whenever fappenhosen is involved.